La traducción al español aquí.

And hated leader. Because, if anything should to have clear a leader, it is that not going to be able to reach to captivate everyone and get everyone follow it. Leaders connect on an emotional level, and therefore, they are like the parts of a LEGO or a puzzle and thus, they might form in the future a wonderful things with a team and with other people, for hard we try, we not will accomplish nothing, or in worst of the cases, we will to try to force the junction of the two parts and that one or both blocks will might break.

Steve Jobs, one of the founders of Apple, has become one of the most representative figures of recent times. His leadership, in essence, has been loved by some and hated by others, being difficult to find, as in the cases of a genius, a terms means. Even after his death a few years ago, his figure is still increasing  the expectancy and controversy wherever it might is spoken about him. Which of course happened with a film based on part of his biography, JOBS, directed by Joshua Michael Stern and performed in the title role by Ashton Kutcher.

The leadership of Jobs may be classify into a natural leadership (see article on leadership types), however, it is worked with effort, conflicts, struggles and confrontations. This is because Jobs had a very strong personality, the fruit of a personal context where the abandonment of his real family he will let deeply marked.

To better understand the kind of the leadership of Steve, we may are necessary before, a set of categories and concepts previous that may allow compose the management style of one of the founders of Apple.

The first is the difference between leadership and management style or direction. Every leader has a management style, but not every he have it this latter, they are leaders, because we remember that to be a leader, we need followers, and that coherence checks our essence. Therefore, we must not only try to identify the points that make up the leadership of Jobs, also, the points of his management style.

One theory that I like it and that i believe most significative about management style it is the Bill Reddin theory, mainly his work How to make your management style more effective. The author argues that a good manager is one who with a number of resources, that he is able to answer the questions as what do we achieve?, Where and when will we do it? and how are we doing?. In his words, "the managers have a responsibility to be efficient, after, they have to manage the situation in which should be generated the efficency and then, they have to decide which style they going to use ...".

Under this view, Reddin states that managers are  mainly focus in two areas, or oriented to task (now also we would say at product or at the customer) or oriented to relationships. Appears of crossing both dimensions, the following matrix of leadership styles:

Reddin says that they "tend to dominate others. They offer numerous verbal guidelines to subordinates. Their time perspective is immediate, so when they have to choose, they prefer the "Do it  now". [...] they judge their subordinates depending on what they produce. 

That's the management style of Jobs during the early years of his career. But something was not going well. His close acquaintances go left the boat (traumatic was the march of another founder, the legendary Stephen Wozniak), products like Lisa and Macintosh suffers sales problems and endow a great advantage to its competitors (IBM and Microsoft). His position begins to be discussed by the directors board and finally, he abandoned Apple. His reaction becomes paranoid and only provides a argument, "with him or against him".

His return, years later, coincided with a very difficult situation for the company he had founded. Many doubted that he will was to able of to cope at situation and to change it, everyone had in their mind the first Jobs management style. But something had changed. As he oneself recognizes and collects in many existing biographies on the market, he looks it away from what he himself had created, the blow had supposed betrayal, he supposed to him the need for a change in his personality.

He realized that his personal life was erratic (far away of his daughter, angry with the mother of the same, the bitter distance with many of the friends he had known in the beginning), and conducted an internal conquer for later, to change his external side. This process of the need to achieve internal victory to achieve external victory follows the logic  the Dr. Covey, he has so well explained in The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.

Its old style of management, which Reddin checks as autocrat, he changes and moves towards the benevolent autocrat, characterized by: 

A despite that, he continued oriented to tasks, he follows from the negative side of it, he recognizes his faults and shortcomings and he knows he has to improve its focus on relationships. Something that Jobs was costing it too much, but it was gradually improving.

What Jobs was able to find was a management style that was consistent with his leadership. A natural leadership clearly autocratic, typical of people with a great personality, with the ideas very clear and self-confidents. A leadership based on:

1. Simple and clean is beautiful
2. I am the consumer and I know it what I want as a consumer 
3. The only way is do it well. The mantra is quality, quality, quality. 
4. The products are not only a physical thing, they have to have a soul, generate feelings. 
5. Between the company and the consumer, there must be an emotional bond. 
6. Curiosity. The knowledge is in the place that you least expect to find. 
7. Everything matter, there are not small things. The detail is king. 
8. Work with the best, with the people committed, with those who believe in you. No good or bad workers, only there are employees who demonstrate every day that are best. Talent is a flow, not a stock.